James WalkerAbsolutely, Steve. Do you know what Tannehill's original projection was this year? Holding a clipboard for 16 games. That was Miami's plan when it drafted Tannehill. But he's played well enough to start from Day 1 and barring injury will get through all 16 games.

This is practically the only Phins board I visit. I did not remember seeing anyone calling for his benching here. I was curious if it were so. Since it was a media article I thought maybe some of the media were calling for his benching.

I have been out of the loop for about a week with very limited internet connection and little news and so was curious.

This is practically the only Phins board I visit. I did not remember seeing anyone calling for his benching here. I was curious if it were so. Since it was a media article I thought maybe some of the media were calling for his benching.

I have been out of the loop for about a week with very limited internet connection and little news and so was curious.

I believe the argument came up when discussing "accountability" because of the Bush situation and it wasn't suggested RT be benched for full games.

This is practically the only Phins board I visit. I did not remember seeing anyone calling for his benching here. I was curious if it were so. Since it was a media article I thought maybe some of the media were calling for his benching.

I have been out of the loop for about a week with very limited internet connection and little news and so was curious.

I believe the argument came up when discussing "accountability" because of the Bush situation and it wasn't suggested RT be benched for full games.

I think James Walker creates knee jerk reactions based on how fans might emotionally react after one game and then plays the voice of reason. It then creates this idea that fans are screaming for Tannehill to be benched. Very similar to the trade rumors he created with KC regarding Daniel Thomas and Matt Moore.

James WalkerAbsolutely, Steve. Do you know what Tannehill's original projection was this year? Holding a clipboard for 16 games. That was Miami's plan when it drafted Tannehill. But he's played well enough to start from Day 1 and barring injury will get through all 16 games.

We're ranked 12th in the league in redzone efficiency (TD only) at 56%. Up almost 10% from where we were last season as a team. Last week we were 100% in the redzone. At home, we're at 77% on the year.

While I agree that we could do better in the redzone (there is always room for improvement), what this team needs is more playmakers on the outside and a more consistent run game to help us get to the redzone, and yes, Tannehill needs to step it up as well. We're only 31st in the league in trips to the redzone, that is what is killing us.

This is practically the only Phins board I visit. I did not remember seeing anyone calling for his benching here. I was curious if it were so. Since it was a media article I thought maybe some of the media were calling for his benching.

I have been out of the loop for about a week with very limited internet connection and little news and so was curious.

I believe the argument came up when discussing "accountability" because of the Bush situation and it wasn't suggested RT be benched for full games.

I think James Walker creates knee jerk reactions based on how fans might emotionally react after one game and then plays the voice of reason. It then creates this idea that fans are screaming for Tannehill to be benched. Very similar to the trade rumors he created with KC regarding Daniel Thomas and Matt Moore.

Ah he is going for ratings not reporting. Ok what he wrote makes more sense now. Thanks.

Funny , if Carpenter misses that FG and Seattle pulls the game out I would think opinions here would be that he is behind.I agree with the post that said its amazing how 1 week turns opinions on players.He is having a decent rookie season. As a Dolphin fan I am happy with that. Also as a Dolphin fan forgive me if I take the wait & see approach because we had a QB by the name of FiedlerFeeleyLemonBeckGrieseHenneFrerrotteCulpepperGreenPenningtonHuardRosenfelsThigpenMoorethat was gonna be pretty decent as well.

Funny , if Carpenter misses that FG and Seattle pulls the game out I would think opinions here would be that he is behind.I agree with the post that said its amazing how 1 week turns opinions on players.He is having a decent rookie season. As a Dolphin fan I am happy with that. Also as a Dolphin fan forgive me if I take the wait & see approach because we had a QB by the name of FiedlerFeeleyLemonBeckGrieseHenneFrerrotteCulpepperGreenPenningtonHuardRosenfelsThigpenMoorethat was gonna be pretty decent as well.

Same here man.

Dphins4me wrote:

Just read an article or two on how he should have been benched in one of the recent games. As far as who. Don't recall. Might could do a search for it.

See and I don't see anything wrong with that, particularly when the playoffs were still viable. We have a guy on the bench who's more than capable to come in on spot duty. If Tanny is struggling in-game and playing like complete dog doo doo, then why not try to salvage the game? Obviously it would still be Tanny's team, but it's just like any other player who's playing piss poor. Didn't Whitney Houston once sing, "that's what backups are for" LOL.

That's just my personal opinion .... I know the howling outcry of "but there'd be QB controversy" or "Tanny's confidence would be hurt". In response to the second one, if that happened then he's not the QB of the future. As far as a QB controversy, that's only if they handled it like Jim Harbaugh.

Funny , if Carpenter misses that FG and Seattle pulls the game out I would think opinions here would be that he is behind.I agree with the post that said its amazing how 1 week turns opinions on players.He is having a decent rookie season. As a Dolphin fan I am happy with that. Also as a Dolphin fan forgive me if I take the wait & see approach because we had a QB by the name of FiedlerFeeleyLemonBeckGrieseHenneFrerrotteCulpepperGreenPenningtonHuardRosenfelsThigpenMoorethat was gonna be pretty decent as well.

Same here man.

Dphins4me wrote:

Just read an article or two on how he should have been benched in one of the recent games. As far as who. Don't recall. Might could do a search for it.

See and I don't see anything wrong with that, particularly when the playoffs were still viable. We have a guy on the bench who's more than capable to come in on spot duty. If Tanny is struggling in-game and playing like complete dog doo doo, then why not try to salvage the game? Obviously it would still be Tanny's team, but it's just like any other player who's playing piss poor. Didn't Whitney Houston once sing, "that's what backups are for" LOL.

That's just my personal opinion .... I know the howling outcry of "but there'd be QB controversy" or "Tanny's confidence would be hurt". In response to the second one, if that happened then he's not the QB of the future. As far as a QB controversy, that's only if they handled it like Jim Harbaugh.

If the game is still close, you stick with your rookie starter. You only bench a rookie starter after the game is virtually over and it's late, otherwise you run the risk of the kid not getting valuable reps and learning experiences. Part of being a rookie is making mistakes and then getting back out there and trying to correct them. It's not a pretty process but it's a necessary one. Last weeks game was a perfect example of that. Tannehill played like garbage early on, but then settled down, made his adjustments, and finished strong.

benching Tannehill at any point this season would have been catastrophic to his confidence. That's how high picks end up becoming busts. If they commited to him right out of the gate for week 1 then you gotta ride that pony the rest of the way.

The Colts and Lions allowed Manning and Stafford to make plenty of rookie mistakes and never yanked them. This is the right approach. It's a learning year people.

The point is he is growing. He is getting better. This is the season to go through all the dumb interceptions and other mistakes and learn from them. He is getting valuable playing time and learning a lot the hard way. But he is learning. He doesn't hang his head or show that he is afraid to put it all on the line even after making a rookie mistake. He ran that 2 minute offense at the end of the last game like a seasoned vet. He doesn't look like he is being limited in what he is allowed to do by the coaching staff. The training wheels are off. In comparison Henne was not allowed to call audibles or take chances. This staff will try and win games by being aggressive instead of coaching not to lose them.

What is the standard learning curve? Are there standard stats he should have by now?

Is he ahead of where most of us expected him to be this year? Yes.

The traditional rookie curve is the bench watching a veteran. With defenses much more complex now than in the "old days", I am surprised that rookie quarterbacks are actually able to jump in on game 1 of their rookie year. Aaron Rogers, one of the best QB in the NFL, couldn't do that and took time to develop.

I took these stats from Pro Football Focus and had to use photoshop to put the information together, but Tannehill and the rookie starters from the past two years are doing well in the NFL. Is their QB ratings better than the official QB Efficiency Rating Sytem? Not so sure about that, but PFF definitely use more variables in their ratings ... they are insane.

benching Tannehill at any point this season would have been catastrophic to his confidence. That's how high picks end up becoming busts. If they commited to him right out of the gate for week 1 then you gotta ride that pony the rest of the way.

The Colts and Lions allowed Manning and Stafford to make plenty of rookie mistakes and never yanked them. This is the right approach. It's a learning year people.

This is spot on IMO. If you commit then you commit. You do not start a rookie Qb & expect to be a playoff team. Coach has to think long term, not this year. Sure fans want this year, but when a coach starts doing things to appease fan, he is done.

Once a coach starts getting wishy washy with a QB then its over. We saw it with Henne. TS benched him in order to try & win a few games & Henne was done. A Qb needs to know the coach has his back.

Many a great QB have had horrible rookie yrs. & sometimes bad 2nd yrs. Troy Aikman was one. 9 Tds to 18 Ints. 2nd Yr 11/18. Many other examples. Either a coach believes in the guy or he doesn't.

This is spot on IMO. If you commit then you commit. You do not start a rookie Qb & expect to be a playoff team. Coach has to think long term, not this year. Sure fans want this year, but when a coach starts doing things to appease fan, he is done.

Once a coach starts getting wishy washy with a QB then its over. We saw it with Henne. TS benched him in order to try & win a few games & Henne was done. A Qb needs to know the coach has his back.

Many a great QB have had horrible rookie yrs. & sometimes bad 2nd yrs. Troy Aikman was one. 9 Tds to 18 Ints. 2nd Yr 11/18. Many other examples. Either a coach believes in the guy or he doesn't.

I wouldn't have discussed him if you didn't bring him up. Has nothing to do with hijacking. Pretty simple stuff here.

How and why Henne came out of games is not the same thing as I'm discussing Tanny's situation.

We use other players all the time as references. Does not mean we want to break them down.

I used Aikman earlier as a example in this thread. Did not see you jump on that & start discussing him. Its only because I picked Henne. Had I referenced a non Phin, then you would have moved on, just as you did with Aikman.

Just because a player is referenced, does not mean we need to move the thread into a discussion on him.

We use other players all the time as references. Does not mean we want to break them down.

I used Aikman earlier as a example in this thread. Did not see you jump on that & start discussing him. Its only because I picked Henne. Had I referenced a non Phin, then you would have moved on, just as you did with Aikman.

Just because a player is referenced, does not mean we need to move the thread into a discussion on him.

Uhhhh yeah bud, we actually do break other players down ..... just because we didn't break down Aikman doesn't mean it doesn't happen.

I said nothing derogative about Henne ..... dunno why your panties are all in a wad. Talk about preemptively getting defensive. LOL

Technically speaking the thread is supposed to only be about the player so discussing other players is off-topic anyways, Aikman or Henne. But again you brought him up.

benching Tannehill at any point this season would have been catastrophic to his confidence.

Then he's of weak-mind and not the QB for us if that were the case.

There are multiple ways to bench a quarterback and most of them, such as the way you're suggesting (early to midway through a game), are bad. The only way you can bench a rookie starter is the way Philbin did it in the Tennessee game when he brought Tannehill out on the last series or two of the game once it was out of hand. If you do it that way, the kid already knows the game is over and all that is hurt is his pride from losing. But when you pull the kid early in a game, you send a message that the backup can do a better job, that not only hurts the kid's pride, but it also hurts his confidence. So I agree with you that benching a rookie quarterback isn't the worst thing in the world, it can be a very effective teaching tool if done properly. But if done improperly like you're suggesting (early to midway through a game), it can have the negative effects that everyone is talking about. In other words, you don't wreck the future to try and salvage one game.

There are multiple ways to bench a quarterback and most of them, such as the way you're suggesting (early to midway through a game), are bad. The only way you can bench a rookie starter is the way Philbin did it in the Tennessee game when he brought Tannehill out on the last series or two of the game once it was out of hand. If you do it that way, the kid already knows the game is over and all that is hurt is his pride from losing. But when you pull the kid early in a game, you send a message that the backup can do a better job, that not only hurts the kid's pride, but it also hurts his confidence. So I agree with you that benching a rookie quarterback isn't the worst thing in the world, it can be a very effective teaching tool if done properly. But if done improperly like you're suggesting (early to midway through a game), it can have the negative effects that everyone is talking about. In other words, you don't wreck the future to try and salvage one game.

Ya, Tannehill's pride is going to be crushed if the coach sits down and tells him "Look hey buddy, this is your team but I want you to take a breather, it's just not your day today." Tannehill isn't stupid, he knows who's team this is. Teammates have made comments about his ability to shake off those kinds of things. Besides, Matt Moore is his backup on a one year deal. Trust me, everyone on the planet knows who they're going to be riding with the next few years.

Alas, I'm not talking about "salvaging just one game" .... I'm talking about the larger picture of salvaging playoffs. So if Moore came in the 2nd half as we're down 24-3, I don't see the issue with it. By statistics this year we had no shot of coming back with Tanny so what's the big problem? What's the worse than can happen? If they come from behind and win, they say thank you Matt you did your job ..... then give the ball back to Tanny. We then sit with 5 losses and only 2 games behind the Pats with 2 games left against them.

Why is it we only make this excuse about pride and ego for the QB's, other positions have to "tough it out and be accountable." There's no unwritten understanding that backups only play when the starter is injured. I love how it's easy to assume he'll have some fragile ego crushed, instead of perhaps him learning how important it is to not cough up the ball multiple times by sitting on the bench in the second half. Now if you do that multiple times in the season, then you're pushing it and that is not what I'm proposing.

There are multiple ways to bench a quarterback and most of them, such as the way you're suggesting (early to midway through a game), are bad. The only way you can bench a rookie starter is the way Philbin did it in the Tennessee game when he brought Tannehill out on the last series or two of the game once it was out of hand. If you do it that way, the kid already knows the game is over and all that is hurt is his pride from losing. But when you pull the kid early in a game, you send a message that the backup can do a better job, that not only hurts the kid's pride, but it also hurts his confidence. So I agree with you that benching a rookie quarterback isn't the worst thing in the world, it can be a very effective teaching tool if done properly. But if done improperly like you're suggesting (early to midway through a game), it can have the negative effects that everyone is talking about. In other words, you don't wreck the future to try and salvage one game.

Ya, Tannehill's pride is going to be crushed if the coach sits down and tells him "Look hey buddy, this is your team but I want you to take a breather, it's just not your day today." Tannehill isn't stupid, he knows who's team this is. Teammates have made comments about his ability to shake off those kinds of things. Besides, Matt Moore is his backup on a one year deal. Trust me, everyone on the planet knows who they're going to be riding with the next few years.

Alas, I'm not talking about "salvaging just one game" .... I'm talking about the larger picture of salvaging playoffs. So if Moore came in the 2nd half as we're down 24-3, I don't see the issue with it. By statistics this year we had no shot of coming back with Tanny so what's the big problem? What's the worse than can happen? If they come from behind and win, they say thank you Matt you did your job ..... then give the ball back to Tanny. We then sit with 5 losses and only 2 games behind the Pats with 2 games left against them.

Why is it we only make this excuse about pride and ego for the QB's, other positions have to "tough it out and be accountable." There's no unwritten understanding that backups only play when the starter is injured. I love how it's easy to assume he'll have some fragile ego crushed, instead of perhaps him learning how important it is to not cough up the ball multiple times by sitting on the bench in the second half. Now if you do that multiple times in the season, then you're pushing it and that is not what I'm proposing.

That's fine as long as it's late in the game. You don't make a switch in my opinion before the 4th quarter. If the guy plays bad in the 1st half, you make your adjustments and send him back out there in the 3rd to see if he can get it right. If he isn't figuring things out by the early to mid 4th quarter, and the game is getting away from him, then I have no issue benching a rookie quarterback to prove a point and teach him a lesson. I just wouldn't make a habit of it.

Just on a side note, I don't think there was a single game this year where we could have turned the ball over to Moore in a lopsided game and finished with a win, or anywhere close to it. In the Houston game, benching Tannehill in his first game would have sent a very bad message. In the Tennessee game, we actually did bench him late, which I felt was the proper move. Before that game, it's important to note that Tannehill had gone six weeks without an interception.

The rest of our losses we were competitive. We lost by five to Buffalo, and had it not been for a missed fieldgoal and a late INT, we might have been able to steal that one. The rest of our losses were by a fieldgoal. We've been very competitive this year for the most part. Could our record be better, sure, we've made mistakes, but overall we're still doing pretty good for a team rebuilding with a rookie head coach and a rookie quarterback.

This is spot on IMO. If you commit then you commit. You do not start a rookie Qb & expect to be a playoff team. Coach has to think long term, not this year. Sure fans want this year, but when a coach starts doing things to appease fan, he is done.

Once a coach starts getting wishy washy with a QB then its over. We saw it with Henne. TS benched him in order to try & win a few games & Henne was done. A Qb needs to know the coach has his back. Many a great QB have had horrible rookie yrs. & sometimes bad 2nd yrs. Troy Aikman was one. 9 Tds to 18 Ints. 2nd Yr 11/18. Many other examples. Either a coach believes in the guy or he doesn't.

thats the problem with most of the posters here bitching every time he makes a bad play to replace him with the journeyman backup. We are planning for a better future, not the same old 6-10 Dolphin team every year. The idea is to build around Tanny until we become one of those perennial playoff teams.

This is spot on IMO. If you commit then you commit. You do not start a rookie Qb & expect to be a playoff team. Coach has to think long term, not this year. Sure fans want this year, but when a coach starts doing things to appease fan, he is done.

Once a coach starts getting wishy washy with a QB then its over. We saw it with Henne. TS benched him in order to try & win a few games & Henne was done. A Qb needs to know the coach has his back.

Many a great QB have had horrible rookie yrs. & sometimes bad 2nd yrs. Troy Aikman was one. 9 Tds to 18 Ints. 2nd Yr 11/18. Many other examples. Either a coach believes in the guy or he doesn't.

That is NOT why Henne didn't make it.

Oh we forget you're the expert "all-knowing OZ" when it comes to quarterbacks. You're flat wrong.